TfL plan to extend Oyster Pay As You Go acceptance to Shenfield &
Cheshunt when the Greater Anglia franchise is renewed.

See page 7 of http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...12-05-2010.pdf

Shenfield fits in well with Crossrail, but the Hertford East branch
would be an annoying omission if FCC acceptance eventually extends to
its inner suburban boundary at Hertford North.

On 14 May, 16:40, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:
TfL plan to extend Oyster Pay As You Go acceptance to Shenfield &
Cheshunt when the Greater Anglia franchise is renewed.

See page 7 ofhttp://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Item08-LR-MD-Report-...

Shenfield fits in well with Crossrail, but the Hertford East branch
would be an annoying omission if FCC acceptance eventually extends to
its inner suburban boundary at Hertford North.

It would be nice if Oyster were extended to all stations within the
perimeter bounded by Amersham and the "London" Airports in the sticks
- Gatwick, Luton and Stansted. But I'm probably thinking decades into
the future!

"Matthew Dickinson" wrote in message
...
TfL plan to extend Oyster Pay As You Go acceptance to Shenfield &
Cheshunt when the Greater Anglia franchise is renewed.

See page 7 of
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...12-05-2010.pdf

Shenfield fits in well with Crossrail, but the Hertford East branch
would be an annoying omission if FCC acceptance eventually extends to
its inner suburban boundary at Hertford North.

I wonder how this is going to affect railcard holders?

There is already a case where cash return fares from the station at the edge
of the "Oyster" boundary is more expensive than from the first station
outside.

Is this change going to move that boundary or is someone going to insist
that the rail companies should continue to honour railcard discounts (for
the types of card that cannot currently be loaded onto Oyster)


tim

On 14 May, 17:08, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:
On 14 May, 16:40, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:

TfL plan to extend Oyster Pay As You Go acceptance to Shenfield &
Cheshunt when the Greater Anglia franchise is renewed.

See page 7 ofhttp://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Item08-LR-MD-Report-...

Shenfield fits in well with Crossrail, but the Hertford East branch
would be an annoying omission if FCC acceptance eventually extends to
its inner suburban boundary at Hertford North.

It would be nice if Oyster were extended to all stations within the
perimeter bounded by Amersham and the "London" Airports in the sticks
- Gatwick, Luton and Stansted. But I'm probably thinking decades into
the future!

It seems like every time I'm on a train south of East Croydon that I
see someone presenting an Oyster Card or Travelcard to the conductor
who thinks that they can travel to Gatwick Airport using it.
Presumably there are a lot of unresolved journeys being undertaken and
people looking for an Oyster pad at Gatwick.

Coulsdon South, Merstham, Horley and Reigate are scheduled for ticket
gates although maybe not this year [1] so maybe they will accept
Oyster at Gatwick Airport once that is done.

[1] http://www.ashteadresidents.org.uk/0410.pdf - Southern stakeholder
briefing
More automatic ticket gates on the network

We are installing automatic ticket gates at 15 stations this year. The
gates will help reduce the number of people travelling without a valid
ticket which is estimated to cost the UK rail industry up to £190
million every year. The gates will also discourage unauthorised entry
to the station, reducing the risk of vandalism and improving security
for genuine passengers. With the gates will come additional members of
staff to help operate the gates and assist passengers at these
stations.

The gates are planned to be in use at the first station – Dorking – by
the end of April. The next stations a Bognor Regis, Three Bridges,
Angmering, Crawley, Shoreham-by-Sea, Hassocks, Falmer, Polegate,
Portslade, Burgess Hill, Haywards Heath, Ashtead, Leatherhead and East
Grinstead. There are later plans for Coulsdon South, Horley, Merstham,
Reigate and Oxted.

On May 14, 5:08*pm, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:
On 14 May, 16:40, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:

TfL plan to extend Oyster Pay As You Go acceptance to Shenfield &
Cheshunt when the Greater Anglia franchise is renewed.

See page 7 ofhttp://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Item08-LR-MD-Report-...

Shenfield fits in well with Crossrail, but the Hertford East branch
would be an annoying omission if FCC acceptance eventually extends to
its inner suburban boundary at Hertford North.

It would be nice if Oyster were extended to all stations within the
perimeter bounded by Amersham and the "London" Airports in the sticks
- Gatwick, Luton and Stansted. But I'm probably thinking decades into
the future!

I've always thought that reinstating/building a line from Broxbourne
to Rickmansworth would be worthwhile.

Heading west, first improve the Hertford East branch, then reinstate
Hertford East to Cole Green. Next, swing south to be able to run
through Hatfield Station. Reinstate Hatfield to St Albans, with a bit
of realignment south of St. Albans Abbey to enable a through route,
then improve the Abbey line to Watford. Add an underpass to the DC
lines, then run/take over the Croxley Link and Watford branch of the
Met to Rickmansworth.

All of that would be viable for operation using Oyster (as it would
run between the outer boundaries of its validity), perhaps with
Rickmansworth(CML), Watford(WCML), St. Albans(MML), Hatfield(ECML),
Hertford North(ECML) and Cheshunt(WAML) in zone 9, and the lines
between them in a zone 10. Perhaps these major stations could be in
zone 9+10, but having them separate is a practical way of extracting
more (multi-zone) revenue from those using the lines for longer
journeys, whilst having the local fares low enough to encourage use.
More likely, I suspect, more zones would be required to hike the fares
for distance travellers though. I'd be interested what other could
come up with that worked in a fairer way.

I also looked into the timings, and I think you could happily travel
between each of the major stations in about 16 minutes, so end to end
would be about 16+16+16+16+16 = ~80 minutes. To do said trip currently
would take, (according to NRE), 113 minutes, go through zone 1, and
cost £15.70, which I'm certain could be beaten by Oyster-ised prices.

On 14/05/2010 20:44, Jamie Thompson wrote:

I've always thought that reinstating/building a line from Broxbourne
to Rickmansworth would be worthwhile.

Heading west, first improve the Hertford East branch, then reinstate
Hertford East to Cole Green. Next, swing south to be able to run
through Hatfield Station. Reinstate Hatfield to St Albans, with a bit
of realignment south of St. Albans Abbey to enable a through route,
then improve the Abbey line to Watford. Add an underpass to the DC
lines, then run/take over the Croxley Link and Watford branch of the
Met to Rickmansworth.

All of that would be viable for operation using Oyster (as it would
run between the outer boundaries of its validity), perhaps with
Rickmansworth(CML), Watford(WCML), St. Albans(MML), Hatfield(ECML),
Hertford North(ECML) and Cheshunt(WAML) in zone 9, and the lines
between them in a zone 10. Perhaps these major stations could be in
zone 9+10, but having them separate is a practical way of extracting
more (multi-zone) revenue from those using the lines for longer
journeys, whilst having the local fares low enough to encourage use.
More likely, I suspect, more zones would be required to hike the fares
for distance travellers though. I'd be interested what other could
come up with that worked in a fairer way.

I also looked into the timings, and I think you could happily travel
between each of the major stations in about 16 minutes, so end to end
would be about 16+16+16+16+16 = ~80 minutes. To do said trip currently
would take, (according to NRE), 113 minutes, go through zone 1, and
cost £15.70, which I'm certain could be beaten by Oyster-ised prices.

So not only are you planning to build a railway that no-one will use,
you've already worked out a price structure to make sure that even if it
was full it wouldn't cover its running costs.

On 14 May, 20:41, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2010 11:23:08 -0700 (PDT), Jonathan Harris

wrote:
[1]http://www.ashteadresidents.org.uk/0410.pdf- Southern stakeholder
briefing
More automatic ticket gates on the network

We are installing automatic ticket gates at 15 stations this year.

[snip]

The gates are planned to be in use at the first station – Dorking – by
the end of April. The next stations a Bognor Regis, Three Bridges,
Angmering, Crawley, Shoreham-by-Sea, Hassocks, Falmer, Polegate,
Portslade, Burgess Hill, Haywards Heath, Ashtead, Leatherhead and East
Grinstead. There are later plans for Coulsdon South, Horley, Merstham,
Reigate and Oxted.

The only station on that list I am moderately familiar with is Burgess
Hill. I cannot conceive as to how they put any ticket gates in at that
station. The ticket hall is tiny as is the overbridge. *Putting revenue
inspectors in place causes a jam with even a moderate flow of people -
god knows what the AM peak demand level is like. *People will be queuing
back into the High Street to get into the station!

I dread to think what mess they are going to install.

Visit Brockley in the evening rush and you will get an idea of what it
will be like (can't remember if the gates were installed during
Southern management).

This is now run by London Overground, who are particularly strict
about shutting the accessible gate from the platform which everyone
used to use, and forcing everyone into the narrow bridge where the
barriers and ticket office are.

This is constantly jammed solid with people queuing all the way down
the stairs and on to the platform. I have complained that it's
dangerous, but the staff insist that they are "not permitted" to open
the gate from the platform (which has a Oyster pad).

On 15/05/2010 08:15, MIG wrote:

Visit Brockley in the evening rush and you will get an idea of what it
will be like (can't remember if the gates were installed during
Southern management).

This is now run by London Overground, who are particularly strict
about shutting the accessible gate from the platform which everyone
used to use, and forcing everyone into the narrow bridge where the
barriers and ticket office are.

This is constantly jammed solid with people queuing all the way down
the stairs and on to the platform. I have complained that it's
dangerous, but the staff insist that they are "not permitted" to open
the gate from the platform (which has a Oyster pad).

If the open side is the Coulgate Street side, surely nearly all
passengers are alighting on that platform anyway.

On 15 May, 12:39, Basil Jet wrote:
On 15/05/2010 08:15, MIG wrote:



Visit Brockley in the evening rush and you will get an idea of what it
will be like (can't remember if the gates were installed during
Southern management).

This is now run by London Overground, who are particularly strict
about shutting the accessible gate from the platform which everyone
used to use, and forcing everyone into the narrow bridge where the
barriers and ticket office are.

This is constantly jammed solid with people queuing all the way down
the stairs and on to the platform. *I have complained that it's
dangerous, but the staff insist that they are "not permitted" to open
the gate from the platform (which has a Oyster pad).

If the open side is the Coulgate Street side, surely nearly all
passengers are alighting on that platform anyway.

That is the side where most people are alighting and where there used
to be a direct exit to Coulgate Street.

Now it is not possible to exit to Coulgate Street without going up on
the the bridge, getting jammed by the barriers, and then going down
again via the new landscaped lump.

Stranger than fiction.

On May 14, 9:10*pm, Basil Jet wrote:
So not only are you planning to build a railway that no-one will use,
you've already worked out a price structure to make sure that even if it
was full it wouldn't cover its running costs.

How terribly constructive.

I would use it (if they could get the connections right), as I
currently have to go via zone 1 from the WCML out near the M25 to get
to the ECML (heading further out, but that irrelevant). I would think
that any reduction of the load (no matter how small) on the SSL lines
between Edgware Road and Liverpool St. would be quite helpful. It
would also help increase improve the employment options between the
areas it served; I suspect my friend who has to get a lift to work
from his home near the WCML to Hatfield (he doesn't drive) would
probably be equally appreciate of a faster service he could use on his
own, rather than the painfully slow buses running over incredibly
congested roads (they wouldn't be congested if people didn't want to
make those journeys).

Besides, hasn't public transport always supposed to have been about
wider socio-economic benefits rather than just being economic in
isolation?